Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/120/2022

THE CHANDIGARH GOLF CLUB - Complainant(s)

Versus

JASKIRAT SINGH DULLET - Opp.Party(s)

SHIKHAR SARIN ADV.

31 Jan 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T. CHANDIGARH

[ADDITIONAL BENCH]

============

Appeal No	:	A/120/2022
Date  of  Institution	:	02/09/2022
Date   of   Decision	:	31/01/2023

 

 

 

 

 

The Chandigarh Golf Club, Sector 6, Near Punjab Raj Bhawan, Chandigarh, through its General Manager, Col. Arun Preet Singh Johal.

…. Appellant

 

V E R S U S

 

Jaskirat Singh Dullet son of Sh.Amarjit Singh Dullet, Resident of House No. 6181, Modern Housing Complex, Manimajra, Chandigarh.

…… Respondent

 

BEFORE:   MRS. PADMA PANDEY       PRESIDING MEMBER

          PREETINDER SINGH        MEMBER

 

PRESENT	:	Sh. Shikhar Sarin, Advocate for the Appellant.
		Sh. Nikhil Sabharwal, Advocate for the Respondent.

 

PER PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

 

This appeal is directed against the order dated 30.06.2022, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh (for brevity hereinafter to be referred as “the Ld. Lower Commission”), vide which, it allowed the Consumer Complaint bearing no. CC/313/2021, in the following terms:-

“6.  For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is disposed of with a direction to the OP to conduct Golf Proficiency Test of the complainant and thereafter to assess his eligibility for permanent membership as per the applicable rules/regulations within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.”

 

2.      Before the Ld. Lower Commission, it was the case of the Respondent/ Complainant that the Appellant/OP-Club is governed by the Memorandum of Association and Rules & Regulations and by the Bye-laws. The Respondent/complainant was granted ‘student membership’ in year 2001, which was terminated in the year 2007, as  he fulfilled the criteria to become a Green Card Member as he was playing at a handicap of less than 6 and accordingly, was issued Green Card Members. According to the Respondent/complainant, he  was entitled  to the permanent membership of the Appellant/OP-Club including the voting rights as per Clause 10 of the Bye-laws 2020, as he is currently playing at a handicap of 7 which is much less then as prescribed in Clause 10. Vide letter dated 16.11.2017, the Respondent/Complainant was required to come present at Chandigarh Golf Club for taking the golf proficiency test, as he had already figured in the seniority roll and was eligible for being granted Permanent Membership. However, he could not take the test and wrote an e-mail to the Appellant/OP on 24.11.2017 requesting for a new date for golf proficiency test.  Despite his repeated requests, the Respondent/ Complainant was not being granted the Permanent Membership of the Appellant/OP-club and always shunned away by giving one lame excuse or another.  The Respondent/ Complainant also submitted detailed representation dated 22.03.2019 in this regard. When nothing positive could come out, a legal notice dated 01.07.2020 was also served upon the Appellant/OP but to no effect. Hence, the aforesaid Consumer Complaint was filed before the Ld. Lower Commission, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party.

 

3.      Despite due service through speed post, the Appellant/Opposite Party failed to put in appearance before the Ld. Lower Commission and as a result thereof, it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.02.2022.

 

4.      On appraisal of the pleadings and the evidence adduced on record, Ld. Lower Commission allowed the Complaint of the Respondent/ Complainant as noticed in the opening para of this order.     

 

5.      Aggrieved against the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. Lower Commission, the instant Appeal has been filed by the Appellant/OP.

 

6.      We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Parties and have gone through the evidence and record of the case with utmost care and circumspection, along with the written arguments advanced on behalf of the parties.

 

7.      The core question that falls for consideration before us is as to whether the Ld. Lower Commission has rightly passed the impugned order by appreciating the entire material placed before it. 

 

8.      After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions raised and material on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the instant Appeal is liable to be dismissed for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.

 

9.      Record transpires, the Appellant/OP was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte by the Ld. Lower Commission vide order dated 18.02.2022. However, the said order has not been assailed by the Appellant/OP. Interestingly, there is no prayer for remand of the matter to the Ld. Lower Commission for fresh hearing. Rather, the sole challenge has been laid to the final order dated 30.06.2022 passed by the Ld. Lower Commission.

 

10.      Learned Counsel for the Appellant/ OP argued that at the time of notice, the Club was closed due to Covid-19 Pandemic. However, we are not impressed with the same, in as much as, the said limb of argument has not been substantiated by any evidence, documentary or otherwise. Pertinently, by June 2021, the Covid-19 Pandemic had to a larger extent died down and all the public places had been opened up, but with limited capacity and social distancing. Thus, in the absence of any proof, the argument raised by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant/OP to the effect that the Club was closed down, to our mind, does not merit consideration and the same is rejected.

 

11.      Admittedly, the Respondent/Complainant has been a member of the Appellant/OP-Club for more than 20 years. Further, on the basis of his proficiency as a player in the game of Golf, the Respondent/ Complainant was granted a green card membership on 12.07.2007. As per the extant Rules & Regulations of the Appellant Club, there was no bar for a student member, who had been given a green card membership on the basis of his proficiency as a player, to further be promoted to a permanent member by undergoing a Gold Proficiency Test and achieving a prescribed Golf handicap (`handicap’ is a golfing term used to evaluate the proficiency of a golf player; the lower the handicap, the better the player is considered at the game of Golf). Considering the fact that the Respondent/Complainant had been a proficient Golf player as a member the appellate Club over 15 years at the time and was operating at an impressive Golf handicap of 7, the management of the Appellant Club issued a letter dated 16.11.2017 (Annexure C-7) to the respondent whereby inviting him to undergo a Golf Proficiency Test on 22.11.2017 in order to ascertain his seniority in the 0-9 handicap list. The aforesaid proficiency test and the consequent seniority allotted to the Respondent/ Complainant was supposed to determine the eligibility of the Respondent/ Complainant for permanent membership in the Appellant Club.

 

12.      It is borne on record that the Respondent/ Complainant was not able to take this proficiency test on the stipulated date i.e. 22.11.2017 owing to the fact that the he was already participating in the National Shooting Championship being held at New Delhi from 22.11.2017 to 25.11.2017. The inability of the Respondent/Complainant to undertake the Golf Proficiency Test on the stipulated date was duly conveyed to the Appellant/OP-Club vide e-mail dated 21.12.2017 (Annexure C-8), wherein the Appellant-Club was requested to reschedule the above said test to some other date. However, the Appellant Club neither replied to the above said e-mail nor to the numerous reminders sent by the Complainant/Respondent. 

 

13.      In order to buttress his arguments, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the aforesaid invitation dated 16.11.2017 was inadvertently sent to the Respondent/Complainant due to an oversight to undergo the proficiency test in the office of the Club and that the Appellant club does not allow that student members who have been given a green card membership to be further promoted to a permanent membership as a matter of convention in the Club. However, we do not find any merit in this argument also for the sole reason that the same is an afterthought as the Appellant never issued any letter or communication recalling the earlier letter/ invitation dated 16.11.2017 or even otherwise ever communicated to the Respondent/ Complainant that he was not eligible to be considered for the permanent membership of the Club.

 

14.      So far as the second plea of the appellant regarding there being a convention of not allowing permanent membership to student members who have been given a green card membership, is concerned, it is seen that the Bye-laws 2020 were in force when the complaint was filed by the Complainant/Respondent before the Ld. Lower Commission on 21.05.2021. The said Bye-laws lay down the eligibility for green card holders to be induced as permanent members of the club. Also, the amended Bye-laws came into force with effect from 01.06.2021 and the complaint was filed before the Ld. Lower Commission on 21.05.2021 which was well before the date when the amended Bye-laws came into force. The amended Bye-laws, therefore, are not applicable in the present case and the plea raised by the Appellant cannot be accepted at its face value and is thus, declined.

 

15.      In view of the foregoings, to our mind, the Ld. Lower Commission has, therefore, rightly recorded a categoric finding that the Respondent/ Complainant should have been afforded an opportunity for his Golf Proficiency Test and directed the Appellant/OP to conduct Golf Proficiency Test of the complainant and thereafter to assess his eligibility for permanent membership as per the applicable rules/regulations. It is demonstrable from a reading of the impugned Order of the Ld. Lower Commission that it is certainly not an order passed without reasons or without applying the judicious mind. The facts and circumstances of the case have been gone into, weighed and considered, and due analysis of the same has been made. It also does not appear to be an order passed without taking into account the available evidence.

 

16.      No other point, was urged, by the Counsel for the Parties.

 

17.      In the wake of the position, as sketched out above, we are dissuaded to interfere with the impugned order rendered by the Ld. Lower Commission. The appeal being bereft of merit is accordingly dismissed.

 

18.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.

 

19.      The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced

31^st Jan.,2023                                 

Sd/-

                                  (PADMA PANDEY)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(PREETINDER SINGH)

MEMBER

“Dutt”